Sunday, March 31, 2013

This week’s GOP autopsy report, commissioned by RNC Chairman Reince Priebus, is a great start in the much-needed task of rebranding the Republican Party. As the chairman acknowledged, “the way we communicate our principles isn’t resonating widely enough” and “we have to be more inclusive.” The report contains 219 recommendations to “connect people to our principles.” To achieve that goal, the party will need a strategic vision of how voters think about politics, which is something that the report lacks. For that, the GOP can learn a lot from another American passion: baseball.

This year, about 75 million Americans will go to the baseball stadium to watch a ballgame, about the same number as those who will vote in next year’s election. We rarely think about why someone becomes a baseball fan, or why they root for a certain team. Nor do we usually think about why someone chooses to vote for a certain political party. But it’s actually a very useful exercise.

When it comes to baseball, fan loyalty has almost nothing to do with the brain, and almost everything to do with the heart. In all of history, there’s never been a baseball fan who rooted for his team because it had the lowest ticket prices, or because it had the most taxpayer-friendly stadium deal, or because its players did the most community service. For the vast majority of Americans, rooting for a baseball team — not to mention, voting for a political party — isn’t really a rational choice; it’s more of a statement of personal identity — a statement telling the world, “This is who I am.” And for most people, defining “who I am” starts with family and community, before branching out into areas like race, age, gender, and class.

Family is pretty straightforward. If your mom and dad are Yankee fans, you’re almost certainly a Yankee fan. The same is true in politics. If your mom and dad are Republicans, you’re almost certainly a Republican.

Community is also pretty straightforward. If you grew up in, say, Philadelphia, chances are pretty great you’re a Phillies fan. Likewise, someone who grew up in Republican territory like, say, suburban Dallas or rural Indiana is much more likely to become a Republican than a nearly identical person from Seattle or Santa Fe.

Cities with more than one baseball team, like New York or Chicago, show revealing breakdowns by race and gender. The racial split in Chicago between Cubs fans on the North Side and White Sox fans on the South Side is well-documented. In New York, there’s an intriguing gender gap between Mets and Yankee fans, with women gravitating a lot more to the Yanks. While there’s a few theories out there trying to explain that, one obvious answer leaps out: Yankees heartthrob Derek Jeter.

In sports, as in politics, people’s convictions can’t be conveniently reduced to who their parents are or what they look like. But those things are an important foundation, upon which more rational sentiments come into being. Once you’re attached to your team on an emotional level — seeing them as a personal reflection of who you are and what you care about most — a rational exterior comes into being through phrases like “the Red Sox are the best team because they have the most heart” or “the Republicans are the best party because they know how to create jobs.”

Reader Comments and Retorts

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

You're joking, right? Chechnya is a hotbed of Islamic extermism, thanks in no small part to two decades of Russian repression.

It was mostly to poke Joey, who I'm guessing at this point had Communist parents, as often as he spits out his favorite absolutely dead term for their misguided children.

That being said, Marxist/Leninist atheism is within the labrynth of Communist tenets, so it ain't out of nowhere, I'd have thought. I haven't really been following Chechan Islam, are they also Communists?

Thanks. I should have reached for the caffeine first, not the keyboard.

I haven't really been following Chechan Islam, are they also Communists?

Well, it's complex. Most of them are separatists with a religious/ethnic bent and who resent ethnic Russians but there is a significant portion who have latched on to the islamo-fascist movement. I would think these guys fall into the latter category because if they were simply separatists, I can't think of anything else they could have done which would help their cause less.

I can't think of anything else they could have done which would help their cause less.

We don't actually know yet they have a cause, althought they obviously could.

If they have been here a long time, have parents and friends to interview, I'll be interested to see if they are Islamist extremists as is being assumed or perhaps just following in the screwed-up teenager slaughterfest push.

Note: I will not be surprised by the former, but it will be interesting to see what comes out.

If they have been here a long time, have parents and friends to interview, I'll be interested to see if they are Islamist extremists as is being assumed or perhaps just following in the screwed-up teenager slaughterfest push.

IIRC: one or both have been here since '01; have been described as "refugees of war"; popular (or popular enough), affable kids - both athletes, bright; uncle called them bastards, said they deserved to die - but I don't know if that's only in the context of knowing what they've done. AP interviewed father (who lives in Russia) as well who called son (susp #2) "a true angel".

Hopefully the fact that they're "white" Muslims from an area the US has nothing to do with will lead to some honest discussion about Islamic extremism and terrorism. There isn t even a fig leaf of "justification" for this gutless act.

Don't think this guy is very good at being a terrorist (apart from the evading capture over the last several hours part) but, he is reportedly bright.
Mother Jones noted that the dead guy had on a playlist a video on 'religious prophecy associated with Al Qaeda'.

I have a real problem trying to get inside the head of a guy like this, especially given how little we know about him and his motivations. Might decide he wants the spectacle of a trial and all that-- my assumption is that these kids are both a bit fractured in the head to do something like this, and those types don't always have the most stable wants and desires.

Hopefully the fact that they're "white" Muslims from an area the US has nothing to do with will lead to some honest discussion about Islamic extremism and terrorism. There isn t even a fig leaf of "justification" for this gutless act.

Aren't you jumping to conclusions a bit by assuming they did this because they may or may not be Islamic and may or may not be extremists? Maybe we can have an honest discussion about why you immediately think it's due to the country they have not lived in for 12 years being Islamic.

Bright enough to evade the entire weight of local, state, and national law enforcement in a very small area for something like 8 hours now.

Not bright enough to be disguised in anyway when they drop the bags. Not bright enough to have an escape from the area mapped out. Not bright enough to have cash on hand to hole up. Not bright enough to build a better bomb. Not bright enough to not get flushed out with posting of their picture.

Whatever the reason they did this, it really looks to me like they're a couple of idiots who decided to "make a statement" but aren't bright enough to either get away or gutsy enough to actually make a final stand.

If rob a convenience store is your big plan for food and money post becoming a terrorist, you aren't too bright.

No offense, Jason, but this is why I don't jump in these threads. Anyway, hopefully the cops in Boston do their job and get this idiot safely. Hopefully we can remain calm and measured about the aftermath.

I thought those deaths were caused moreso by the Russian SWAT team that was a little overzealous. Although obviously the Chechnyans 'started' it by taking a theatre hostage.

It's actually more interesting than that. The Russians pumped an unknown chemical agent into the theater's ventilation system in order to incapacitate the hostage-takers. It worked, but a large number of the hostages died as a result of a negative reaction to the gas. There was also some controversy because the Russians refused to tell the hospitals treating the hostages what gas they had used (making it hard to treat them effectively), and it's likely that some hostages died who might otherwise have been saved if more information had been available.

The most commonly accepted theory is that the gas was something called "Kolokol-1", an aerosolized synthetic opiate originally developed by the KGB - possibly a fentanyl derivative suspended in halothane. Nobody really knows for sure, though.

Incidentally, those supporting Afghanistan in this thread are deluded. It was a quagmire from start to never-finish.

I think it's possible that the could have used the period of time when the Taliban had been comprehensively beaten to build something lasting. Would have been tricky. Probably odds against. Would have meant engaging the Pashtun -- something that's never been tried.

Bear in mind that I didn't precisely support the toppling of the Taliban. My take on it was that it was discretionary and potentially unnecessary.

At the time of the invasion there was an awful lot of tension between the Taliban (who had inherited them from our future allies but felt bound by cultural hospitality rules. Bin Laden was not a good guest and that was causing tension.) and it's possible (but not likely) that these could have been exploited.

It is surely worth noting that Mullah Omar's first reaction to 9-11 was along the lines of "No good Muslim could have done something like that" and his first reaction to the demand for Bin Laden was roughly, "Provide us evidence and we'll prosecute him" (the sincerity of this is legitimately questionable since it was followed in short order by, "we don't know where he is" and [roughly] the dog ate my homework")

Still, a massive "hot pursuit and stay the #### out of our way" was totally possible. We chose to topple the Taliban because it was easy and Bush and company were not given to sweating the aftermath.

Hand grenades are a popular gun-show item. Disabled hand grenades, of course, but I imagine there's ways to re-able them.

Yep. Which is why they're popular. The list of idiocy at gun-shows is long. I say that as a guy leaning well right of most people on gun-control issues. (most people - still a healthy population to my right as well).

#3626 The Taliban and Al-Quaeda wre not allied at that time. The had inherited him from the folks they overthrew. Problem from their point of view is there are strong cultural hospitality strictures. (Poke around the Economist website for their story on Pashtunwalli. Some fascinating stories)

Now I'm not arguing that their refusal to hand over Bin Laden (even then it wasn't unconditional. They responded initially with a demand for evidence against Bin Laden. And if this was in good faith -- problematic to be sure -- it's an absolutely legitimate response) was not a legitimate cause for war.

They've come together on the logic of "the enemy of my enemy ..." but they were anything but friends back in the day.

We don't actually know yet they have a cause, althought they obviously could.

From the profile, the likely cause is going to similar to the London and Madrid bombings. The older brother seems to have been radicalized (internally) Islamist, and the little brother is almost certainly going to be following his big brother's footprints. I doubt this is a global plot in any real sense; just some truly out of touch religious fanatics going off the deep end of their own accord.

Yeah..I was thinking, "They robbed a store? And carjacked a guy but didn't kill him? These are some shitty terrorists. They're like the Thelma and Louise of terrorists."

This seems like an example of the difference between smart and savvy. There are lots of people who are intellectually gifted but relatively helpless when it comes to practical judgment or real-world logistics.

So the entire city is on lockdown? Surely that isn't mandatory. He's not The Running Man ffs.

Not mandatory, but straightforward, no need to puzzle out what should close and what should stay open, easier for police to work if people aren't on the streets, and this is not something that looks to last a long time, probably be over by noon.

From the profile, the likely cause is going to similar to the London and Madrid bombings. The older brother seems to have been radicalized (internally) Islamist, and the little brother is almost certainly going to be following his big brother's footprints. I doubt this is a global plot in any real sense; just some truly out of touch religious fanatics going off the deep end of their own accord.

Or maybe not. The character and aims of the Chechnyan movement have changed in recent years, to a broader anti-anti-Muslim bent, according to The Guardian's Moscow correspondent:

In recent years, however, the Kremlin and its regional proxies have been battling a different kind of enemy. This new generation of insurgents has an explicitly Islamist goal: to create a radical pan-Caucasian emirate ruled by Islamist law, a sort of Afghanistan under the Taliban. The movement’s leader, Doku Umarov, unveiled this ambitious vision in 2007. He vowed to liberate not only Russia’s Muslim North Caucausus but a large chunk of European Russia.

Umarov also suggested that devout Muslims should think internationally. His comments, later softened, said: “Today in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, and Palestine our brothers are fighting. Everyone who attacks Muslims wherever they are are our enemies, common enemies. Our enemy is not Russia only, but everyone who wages war against Islam and Muslims.”

This call to global jihad may perhaps offer a possible motive for an attack inside the US. The new generation of twenty-something rebels is also exploiting a powerful new weapon: the internet. The main Chechen rebel website, kavkazcenter.com, posts reports from the jihadi movement worldwide: from Syria, where Chechen diaspora fighters are battling government forces in Aleppo, from Pakistan, and from Turkey.

It's actually more interesting than that. The Russians pumped an unknown chemical agent into the theater's ventilation system in order to incapacitate the hostage-takers. It worked, but a large number of the hostages died as a result of a negative reaction to the gas. There was also some controversy because the Russians refused to tell the hospitals treating the hostages what gas they had used (making it hard to treat them effectively), and it's likely that some hostages died who might otherwise have been saved if more information had been available.

Yeah, I was going to point this out. The Russians killed the folks in that theater. The Chechnyans took the hostages. If ever there existed a situation where radical counterinsurgency/terrorism was a valid form of counter offensive, it was probably Chechnya. The Russians were ####### animals there. (No, this in no way justifies or minimizes the fucqtard crazy of these two/three people in Boston.)

In recent years, however, the Kremlin and its regional proxies have been battling a different kind of enemy. This new generation of insurgents has an explicitly Islamist goal: to create a radical pan-Caucasian emirate ruled by Islamist law, a sort of Afghanistan under the Taliban. The movement’s leader, Doku Umarov, unveiled this ambitious vision in 2007. He vowed to liberate not only Russia’s Muslim North Caucausus but a large chunk of European Russia.

Umarov also suggested that devout Muslims should think internationally. His comments, later softened, said: “Today in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, and Palestine our brothers are fighting. Everyone who attacks Muslims wherever they are are our enemies, common enemies. Our enemy is not Russia only, but everyone who wages war against Islam and Muslims.”

This call to global jihad may perhaps offer a possible motive for an attack inside the US. The new generation of twenty-something rebels is also exploiting a powerful new weapon: the internet. The main Chechen rebel website, kavkazcenter.com, posts reports from the jihadi movement worldwide: from Syria, where Chechen diaspora fighters are battling government forces in Aleppo, from Pakistan, and from Turkey

That's interesting. My understanding of Chechnya is a few years out of date. That said, I doubt there was a lot of material support from overseas, but the level of thought-coordination and psychological support provided via the internet, as noted in the last paragraph, is likely to be significant. This is the down side of the Aaron Swartz/all information must be free sort of utopian thinking.

Yeah, I was going to point this out. The Russians killed the folks in that theater.

To be fair, I think it's extremely likely that in the event of a conventional SWAT-style breach of the theater, the Chechens would have shot as many of the hostages as possible. So it's theoretically possible that gassing the theater was the least-bad of a bad set of options (although personally I'm skeptical of that).

Either way, refusing to aid the treatment of the gassed hostages seems pretty reprehensible.

I don't know if a live feed has been previously linked, but here's one that seems pretty good.

Surreal. This really is playing out just like a Stephen King novel. Those interviews are pages writing themselves. Also right now the kid is holed up in the sewers having a 90 page discourse with his dead brother about Ka.

Another uncle said that he was called by the elder brother yesterday, they hadn't spoken in a few years due to some family squabble, kid asked for forgiveness (don't know if that is in regard to attacks or familial distance - maybe the latter).

To be fair, I think it's extremely likely that in the event of a conventional SWAT-style breach of the theater, the Chechens would have shot as many of the hostages as possible. So it's theoretically possible that gassing the theater was the least-bad of a bad set of options (although personally I'm skeptical of that).

Either way, refusing to aid the treatment of the gassed hostages seems pretty reprehensible.

If ever there existed a situation where radical counterinsurgency/terrorism was a valid form of counter offensive, it was probably Chechnya. The Russians were ####### animals there. (No, this in no way justifies or minimizes the fucqtard crazy of these two/three people in Boston.)

Yeah, but attacking schoolkids and theatergoers is never justified.

Were the Chechens justified in attacking Russian troops, police, and government officials by any means possible; probably yes. A good model would be Michael Collins' campaign that drove the Brits out of Ireland.

Of course they do, something has to ignite the explosive. Modern grenades are armed by removing the safety pin (not with your teeth), and releasing the charging handle. This ignites the fuse which is typically set for approximately five seconds. Once the fuse is ignited there is no turning back, it is going to explode when the fuse burns down and triggers the explosive charge.

What about if they're hanging out with the terrorists you want to drone strike?

That's a very complicated calculation. How dangerous are the terrorists? How innocent are the civilians (i.e. I don't count Bin Laden's wives as innocents)? What other alternatives are there to kill/capture the terrorists? There's no pat answer.

Yes. But there's nothing to prevent you saying roughly, "We're going after Bin Laden. Anybody who gets in our way is presumed hostile."

IE no attempt at regime change. A narrowly focused effort on Bin Laden and company. Now I'm doubtful that the local Pashtun would in fact have stayed out entirely, but if there's one thing that the early stages of the war showed it is that any given local group's loyalty could be rented. (but not bought long term) And while it wouldn't have been cheap or free of carnage it's possible that it would have worked out better for the US.

then you would make a bad terrorist, snapper. as would i (as i agree with you).

I certainly hope I would.

But it's perfectly possible to fight an insurgency w/o terrorism. Targeting the direct forces of your oppressor is far more effective, b/c it doesn't alienate the civilian population, upon whom insurgents depend for support.